Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:43:38.208Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Which Traits Allow Weed Species to Persist in Grass Margin Strips?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2017

Stéphane Cordeau ,
Matthew R. Ryan ,
David A. Bohan ,
Xavier Reboud  and
Bruno Chauvel
Stéphane Cordeau*
Affiliation:
Research Scientist, Agroécologie, AgroSup Dijon, INRA, Université de Bourgogne Franche-Comté, F-21000 Dijon, France, and Visiting Scientist, Soil and Crop Sciences Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Matthew R. Ryan
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Soil and Crop Sciences Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
David A. Bohan
Affiliation:
Research Scientists, Agroécologie, AgroSup Dijon, INRA, Université de Bourgogne Franche-Comté, F-21000 Dijon, France
Xavier Reboud
Affiliation:
Research Scientists, Agroécologie, AgroSup Dijon, INRA, Université de Bourgogne Franche-Comté, F-21000 Dijon, France
Bruno Chauvel
Affiliation:
Research Scientists, Agroécologie, AgroSup Dijon, INRA, Université de Bourgogne Franche-Comté, F-21000 Dijon, France
*
Corresponding author’s E-mail: stephane.cordeau@inra.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sown-grass margin strips, historically established to limit pesticide drift and soil erosion, are now also promoted for enhancing floral diversity and associated ecosystem services. To better understand weed community assembly in grass margin strips, we performed floral surveys in 75 sown-grass margin strips in two regions in France and characterized each species using information from trait databases. We hypothesized that traits of dominant species would differ between newly sown-grass margin strips and older strips. Weed species were separated into functional groups based on their traits using multiple correspondence analysis and hierarchical ascendant classification. Functional group trajectories were investigated in sown-grass margin strips that differed in age using a space-for-time substitution approach. We found that geophyte, competitor, and monocotyledon species were more frequent and abundant in grass margin strips than therophyte, ruderal, and dicotyledon species. Results also showed that floral diversity was greatest in grass margin strips of intermediate age. Our findings have implications for optimizing diversity and ecosystem services on land enrolled in conservation programs and suggest that mowing later in the season and periodic soil disturbance can increase floral diversity. The analytical framework that we introduced in this research can also be used to explore weed community assembly in other systems.

Keywords

Agri-environmental schemescommunity assemblyfield edgefield marginfunctional grouptrait.
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 65 , Issue 3 , May 2017 , pp. 381 - 394
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor for this paper: Bhagirath Chauhan, The University of Queensland

References

Literature Cited

Badenhausser, I, Cordeau, S (2012) Sown grass strip—a stable habitat for grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acrididae) in dynamic agricultural landscapes. Agric Ecosyst Environ 159:105–111 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardet, O, Fédoroff, E, Causse, G, Moret, J (2008) Atlas de la flore sauvage de Bourgogne. Parthénope Collection. Paris: Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle. 749 p Google Scholar
Bazzaz, FA (1979) The physiological ecology of plant succession. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 10:351–371 Google Scholar
Blois, JL, Williams, JW, Fitzpatrick, MC, Jackson, ST, Ferrier, S (2013) Space can substitute for time in predicting climate-change effects on biodiversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110:9374–9379 Google Scholar
Booth, BD, Swanton, CJ (2002) Assembly theory applied to weed communities. Weed Sci 50:2–13 Google Scholar
Cordeau, S, Petit, S, Reboud, X, Chauvel, B (2012a) The impact of sown grass strips on the spatial distribution of weed species in adjacent boundaries and arable fields. Agric Ecosyst Environ 155:35–40 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cordeau, S, Petit, S, Reboud, X, Chauvel, B (2012b) Sown grass strips harbour high weed diversity but decrease weed richness in adjacent crops. Weed Res 52:88–97 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cordeau, S, Reboud, X, Chauvel, B (2010) Relative importance of farming practices and landscape context on the weed flora of sown grass strips. Agric Ecosyst Environ 139: 595–602 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cordeau, S, Reboud, X, Chauvel, B (2011) Farmers’ fears and agro-economic evaluation of sown grass strips in France. Agron Sustain Dev 31:463–473 Google Scholar
Coste, H (1937) Flore descriptive et illustrée de la France, de la Corse et des contrées limitrophes. Paris: Librairie des Sciences Naturelles. 1850 pGoogle Scholar
Critchley, CNR, Fowbert, JA, Sherwood, AJ (2006) The effects of annual cultivation on plant community composition of uncropped arable field boundary strips. Agric Ecosyst Environ 113:196–205 Google Scholar
De Cauwer, B, Reheul, D, De Laethauwer, S, Nijs, I, Milbau, A (2006a) Effect of light and botanical species richness on insect diversity. Agron Sustain Dev 26:35–43 Google Scholar
De Cauwer, B, Reheul, D, D’Hooghe, K, Nijs, I, Milbau, A (2006b) Disturbance effects on early succession of field margins along the shaded and unshaded side of a tree lane. Agric Ecosyst Environ 112:78–86 Google Scholar
de Snoo, GR (1997) Arable flora in sprayed and unsprayed crop edges. Agric Ecosyst Environ 66:223–230 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolle, M, Bernhardt-Romermann, M, Parth, A, Schmidt, W (2008) Changes in life history trait composition during undisturbed old-field succession. Flora 203:508–522 Google Scholar
Dray, S, Dufour, AB (2007) The ade4 package: implementing the duality diagram for ecologists. J Stat Softw 22:1–20 Google Scholar
Dutoit, T, Gerbaud, E, Buisson, E, Roche, P (2003) Dynamics of a weed community in a cereal field created after ploughing a seminatural meadow: roles of the permanent seed bank. Écoscience 10:225–235 Google Scholar
Dufrêne, M, Legendre, P (1997) Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecol Monogr 67:345–366 Google Scholar
Ellenberg, H, Weber, HE, R, RD, Wirth, V, Werner, W, Paulißen, D (1992) Zeigerwerte von Pflantzen in Mitteleuropa. Scripta Geobotanica 18. Göttingen, Germany: Erich Goltze. 260 pGoogle Scholar
European Parliament and council of the European Union (2013) Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 - establishing rules for direct payments to farmers under support schemes within the framework of the common agricultural policy and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 637/2008 and Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:347:0608:0670:en:PDF. Accessed: October 13, 2016Google Scholar
Fournier, P (1947) Les quatre flores de France - Corse comprise (générale, alpine, méditérranéenne). Paris: Lechevalier. Ed. 2000. 1103 pGoogle Scholar
Fried, G, Chauvel, B, Reboud, X (2009a) A functional analysis of large-scale temporal shifts from 1970 to 2000 in weed assemblages of sunflower crops in France. J Veg Sci 20:49–58 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fried, G, Petit, S, Dessaint, F, Reboud, X (2009b) Arable weed decline in Northern France: crop edges as refugia for weed conservation? Biol Conserv 142:238–243 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaudet, CL, Keddy, PA (1988) A comparative approach to predicting competitive ability from plant traits. Nature 334:242–243 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geertsema, W, Opdam, P, Kropff, MJ (2002) Plant strategies and agricultural landscapes: survival in spatially and temporally fragmented habitat. Landsc Ecol 17:263–279 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grime, JP (1979) Plant Strategies and Vegetation Processes. New York: Wiley Google Scholar
Haas, H, Streibig, JC (1982) Changing patterns of weed distribution as a result of herbicide use and other agronomic factors. Pages 57–79, in LeBaron HM, Gressel J, eds. Herbicide Resistance in Plants. New York: Wiley Google Scholar
Hanf, M (1982) Les adventices d’Europe. Ludwigshafen, Germany: BASF Aktiengesellschaft. 496 pGoogle Scholar
Husson, F, Josse, J, Le, S, Mazet, J (2010a) FactoMineR: Multivariate Exploratory Data Analysis and Data Mining with R. R Package v. 1.14. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=FactoMineR.:http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=FactoMineR. Accessed: October 13, 2016Google Scholar
Husson, F, Le, S, Pages, J (2010b) Exploratory Multivariate Analysis by Example Using R. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. 240 p Google Scholar
Jauzein, P (1995) Flore des champs cultivés. Paris: SOPRA–INRA. 898 pGoogle Scholar
Julve, P (1998) BaseFlor. Index botanique, écologique et chorologique de la Flore de France. Version 28/09/2010. Programme Catminat. http://perso.wanadoo.fr/philippe.julve/catminat.htm. Accessed: October 13, 2016Google Scholar
Kahmen, S, Poschlod, P (2004) Plant functional trait responses to grassland succession over 25 years. J Veg Sci 15:21–32 Google Scholar
Kleijn, D, van der Voort, LAC (1997) Conservation headlands for rare arable weeds: the effects of fertilizer application and light penetration on plant growth. Biol Conserv 81:57–67 Google Scholar
Kleyer, M (2002) Validation of plant functional types across two contrasting landscapes. J Veg Sci 13:167–178 Google Scholar
Klotz, S, Kühn, I, Durka, W (2002) BiolFlor: Eine Datenbank zu biologisch-ökologischen Merkmalen der Gefäßpflanzen in Deutschland. Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde 38. Bonn: Bundesamt für Naturschutz. 333 pGoogle Scholar
Lacas, JG, Voltz, M, Gouy, V, Carluer, N, Gril, JJ (2005) Using grassed strips to limit pesticide transfer to surface water: a review. Agron Sustain Dev 25:253–266 Google Scholar
Lavorel, S, Garnier, E (2002) Predicting changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning from plant traits: revisiting the Holy Grail. Funct Ecol 16:545–556 Google Scholar
Lavorel, S, McIntyre, S, Landsberg, J, Forbes, TDA (1997) Plant functional classifications: from general groups to specific groups based on response to disturbance. Trends Ecol Evol 12:474–478 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lebart, L, Morineau, A, Piron, M (1995) Statistique exploratoire multidimensionnelle. Malakoff, France: Dunod. 439 pGoogle Scholar
Liira, J, Schmidt, T, Aavik, T, Arens, P, Augenstein, I, Bailey, D, Billeter, R, Bukacek, R, Burel, F, De Blust, G, De Cock, R, Dirksen, J, Edwards, PJ, Hamersky, R, Herzog, F, Klotz, S, Kuhn, I, Le Coeur, D, Miklova, P, Roubalova, M, Schweiger, O, Smulders, MJM, Van Wingerden, W, Bugter, R, Zobel, M (2008) Plant functional group composition and large-scale species richness in European agricultural landscapes. J Veg Sci 19:3–14 Google Scholar
Marshall, EJP (2009) The impact of landscape structure and sown grass margin strips on weed assemblages in arable crops and their boundaries. Weed Res 49:107–115 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, EJP, West, TM, Kleijn, D (2006) Impacts of an agri-environmental field margin prescription on the flora and fauna of arable farmland in different landscapes. Agric Ecosyst Environ 113:36–44 Google Scholar
[MDA] Maryland Department of Agriculture (2016) Cover Crop Program. http://mda.maryland.gov/resource_conservation/Pages/cover_crop.aspx. Accessed: October 13, 2016Google Scholar
Meiss, H, Munier-Jolain, N, Henriot, F, Caneill, J (2008) Effects of biomass, age and functional traits on regrowth of arable weeds after cutting. J Plant Dis Prot 21:493–499 Google Scholar
Mueller-Dombois, D, Ellenberg, H (1974) Aims and methods of vegetation ecology. New York: Wiley. 547 pGoogle Scholar
R Development Core Team (2011) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing Google Scholar
Raunkiær, C (1934) The Life Forms of Plants and Statistical Plant Geography. (collected translated papers of C. Raunkiaer). London, UK: Oxford University Press. 632 pGoogle Scholar
Reibel, C, Guillemin, JP, Cordeau, S, Chauvel, B (2010) Ability of seedling emergence and plant establishment of weeds in sown grass strips. Pages 177–184 in 21eme Conference du COLUMA: Journees Internationales sur la Lutte contre les Mauvaises Herbes. Dijon, FranceGoogle Scholar
Ryan, MR, Smith, RG, Mirsky, SB, Mortensen, DA, Seidel, R (2010) Management filters and species traits: weed community assembly in long-term organic and conventional systems. Weed Sci 58:265–277 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoate, C, Baldi, A, Beja, P, Boatman, ND, Herzon, I, van Doorn, A, de Snoo, GR, Rakosy, L, Ramwell, C (2009) Ecological impacts of early 21st century agricultural change in Europe—a review. J Environ Manage 91:22–46 Google Scholar
Storkey, J, Westbury, DB (2007) Managing arable weeds for biodiversity. Pest Manage Sci 63:517–523 Google Scholar
[USDA NCRS] U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (2016) Environmental Quality Incentives Program. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/programs/financial/eqip/. Accessed: October 13, 2016Google Scholar
Violle, C, Navas, ML, Vile, D, Kazakou, E, Fortunel, C, Hummel, I, Garnier, E (2007) Let the concept of trait be functional! Oikos 116:882–892 Google Scholar
Walker, KJ, Critchley, CNR, Sherwood, AJ, Large, R, Nuttall, P, Hulmes, S, Rose, R, Mountford, JO (2007) The conservation of arable plants on cereal field margins: an assessment of new agri-environment scheme options in England, UK. Biol Conserv 136:260–270 Google Scholar
Walker, LR, Wardle, DA, Bardgett, RD, Clarkson, BD (2010) The use of chronosequences in studies of ecological succession and soil development. J Ecol 98:725–736 Google Scholar
Westbury, DB, Woodcock, BA, Harris, SJ, Brown, VK, Potts, SG (2008) The effects of seed mix and management on the abundance of desirable and pernicious unsown species in arable buffer strip communities. Weed Res 48:113–123 Google Scholar